New Classifier Percentages

[waktasz]

16 hours ago, stick said:

In my opinion, I don't think it really is.  Please tell me that the static shooters are going to do as well or better than the shooters who are fleet of foot and quick into and out of positions who have the same skill level?  All I'm saying is the classification system doesn't truly measure the total ability of the shooter.  The new HHF will group more shooters together.  It's definitely harder to become a GM.

 

That doesn't make any sense. Raising the HHF doesn't make the classifiers test a shooters total ability either. 

 

 

[stick]

1 hour ago, B_RAD said:

How does the new update better measure the total ability of the shooter anymore than before? It doesn't.  The classifers didn't change at all other than requiring more points in less time, essentially. You're saying since the classifiers were just stand and shoot, they neglected the skills of shooters movement, stage planning.  The updates didn't not change that. 

 

 

 

 

Correct.  I was on my soap box.  I didn't see a need to change to higher hit factors when in my opinion,  the classification system is flawed.

[Balakay]

2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

... There is one classifier actually called "On the Move" and if you want a GM time on it I think you need to shoot that on the move...

 

 

 

Even this classifier requires only  2-3  steps

[stick]

48 minutes ago, waktasz said:

 

That doesn't make any sense. Raising the HHF doesn't make the classifiers test a shooters total ability either. 

 

 

I totally agree.  It doesnt.  I was on my soap box.  Again, I think the classification system is flawed.  Is their a viable solution? I don't know.

[B_RAD]

4 minutes ago, stick said:

Correct.  I was on my soap box.  I didn't see a need to change to higher hit factors when in my opinion,  the classification system is flawed.

Gotcha. I agree 100%. 

[Racinready300ex]

1 minute ago, Balakay said:

Even this classifier requires only  2-3  steps

 

True, but do most shooters shoot it on the move? Not that I've seen. Making them more like stages will be more work and harder to get right. I fear MD's just wouldn't use those classifiers.  If the current style classifiers don't test the right skills, and the HHF's are all screwed up we probably need to kill the entire system and just go heads up.

 

I think the classifiers themselves do a reasonable job of testing skills and separating shooters. Certainly much better than IDPA. It's unfortunate if you're in a area where you end up shooting El Pres 5 times a year or something dumb like that.

[waktasz]

2 hours ago, stick said:

I totally agree.  It doesnt.  I was on my soap box.  Again, I think the classification system is flawed.  Is their a viable solution? I don't know.

 

What is so flawed about it? Looking at match results people are generally ranked in order from GM on down.  I agree the classifiers don't test movement skills for the most part, but apparently that doesn't matter much. 

 

If this whole thread is about dudes who have made GM but get beat at nationals by the Super-GMs then I guess I'm one of those guys and I should feel shame, eh?

 

Even in Chess there are GMs and Super-GMs. Most GMs have NO CHANCE to win a national or world title, but they have still earned the GM title and are better than 99% (warning: made up statistics!)  of the people out there. 

[bluedevil008]

All this does is it means there will be less GM's and Masters in the immediate future, which in my opinion is good because it helps preserve the sanctity of the class, and make it in and of itself more of an achievement.  It will have no bearing on where people place in matches which is what it has alway been about anyways.

[stick]

53 minutes ago, waktasz said:

 

What is so flawed about it? Looking at match results people are generally ranked in order from GM on down.  I agree the classifiers don't test movement skills for the most part, but apparently that doesn't matter much. 

 

If this whole thread is about dudes who have made GM but get beat at nationals by the Super-GMs then I guess I'm one of those guys and I should feel shame, eh?

 

Even in Chess there are GMs and Super-GMs. Most GMs have NO CHANCE to win a national or world title, but they have still earned the GM title and are better than 99% (warning: made up statistics!)  of the people out there. 

Why should you feel ashamed?  You worked hard to earn your classification.  I know I did.  I earned my GM in steel challenge and I trained hard to earn it.  I fully understand that If I shoot nationals, I'll get my butt kicked by some super GM's.  The point I was making was do you know any Super GM's who are static shooters or slow on their feet?  They have excellent footwork, they are fast on their feet and move like butter on a hot skillet.  They will always beat the GM's who cant run or move fast.  

[Racinready300ex]

3 minutes ago, stick said:

GM's who cant run or move fast.  

 

I've yet to see these GM's you're talking about here. (not counting revolver guys)

 

There is essentially a level above GM and we all know it. That doesn't mean the classifier system as a whole is flawed. The results I see at matches tells me the system works fairly well. I do see a few sandbaggers here and there but you never fix that.

[stick]

14 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I've yet to see these GM's you're talking about here. (not counting revolver guys)

 

There is essentially a level above GM and we all know it. That doesn't mean the classifier system as a whole is flawed. The results I see at matches tells me the system works fairly well. I do see a few sandbaggers here and there but you never fix that.

100% agree with you